efilismfandomcom-20200216-history
Efilism Vs. Nihilism
There is strong and indispensable distinction between Efilism and Nihilism -- especially the commonly-understood or colloquial type of Nihilism, that essentially stamps VOID onto life, rejects all value and significance. and/or suspends or voids everything as "subjective" and moves on - this is erroneous. Objective Value Here is the mechanical/material/objective case for value: The answer for why you cannot deny the objective existence and objective value of "feelings and consciousness" lies in the "transparency" of consciousness, sentience, feelings, senses, and life. "Transparency” is a technical term in the modern philosophy of mind. Consciousness is "transparent" if the system using it cannot, by introspection alone, recognize it as a representation. If consciousness were to become "opaque" (that is, if it were actually possible to "value" or "devalue" it as only a mechanical representation, like Hythloday71 and other nihilists suggest), then we would necessarily lose that exact property of consciousness. Think of it as opening a fridge door to check if the light is on or off, the truth of the answer depends on whether the door is open or shut. So you can probably see the problem: To deny the value of consciousness while being a transparent model of consciousness---and while other transparent models keep existing in the universe---you are using an Analysandum of Opacity argument that reduces consciousness to deniable values, which completely misses the Explicandum andExplicans of Transparency that renders that very Analysandum of opaque value-deniability impossible. Until you establish an Explicandum and Explicans of Opacity in consciousness, like DNA did with Transparency, your Analysanda is essentially nothing more than a failed thought experiment that cannot coincide with reality. Inmendham and Efilism understands this, so we do not attempt to refute consciousness as a mechanically opaque, valueless or deniable representation, this philosophy acknowledges consciousness is a mechanically transparent representation that necessarily maintains undeniable properties of value in order to even objectively exist and function. This demonstration concludes why unconstrained theorizing and unconstrained logic (which is technically called Analysanda) is insufficient to discount the Explicandum and Explicans of objective reality. This crucial distinction is what makes-possible the refutation of people's reductionism, nihilism, agnosticism, subjectivism, and so on. Recall that a representation is transparent if the system using it cannot recognize it as a representation. A world-model active in the brain is transparent if the brain has no chance of discovering that it is a model. A model of the current moment is transparent if the brain has no chance of discovering that it is simply the result of information-processing currently going on in itself. We have arrived at a minimalist concept of consciousness. We have an answer to the question of how the brain moves from an internal world-model and an internal Now-model to the full-blown appearance of a world. The answer is this: If the system in which these models are constructed is constitutionally unable to recognize both the world-model and the current psychological moment, the experience of the present, as a model, as only an internal construction, then the system will of necessity generate a reality tunnel. It will have the experience of being in immediate contact with a single, unified world in a single Now. For any such system, a world appears. If we can solve the One-World Problem, the Now Problem, and the Reality Problem, we can also find the global neural correlate of consciousness in the human brain. There is a specific NCC (neural correlate of consciousness) for forms of conscious content (IE. one for the redness of the rose, another for the rose as a whole, and so on) as well as a global NCC, which is a much larger set of neural properties underlying consciousness as a whole, or all currently active forms of conscious content, underpinning your experiential model of the world in its totality at a given moment. Solving the One-World Problem, the Now Problem, and the Reality Problem involves three steps: 1. Finding a suitable phenomenological description of what it’s like to have all these experiences. 2. Analyzing their contents in more detail (the representational level). 3. Describing the functions bringing about these contents. Discovering the global NCC means discovering how these functions are implemented in the nervous system. This would also allow us to decide which other beings on this planet enjoy the appearance of a world; these beings will have a recognizable physical counterpart in their brains. On the most simple and fundamental level, the global NCC will be a dynamic brain state exhibiting large-scale coherence. It will be fully integrated with whatever generates the virtual window of presence, because in a sense it is this window. Finally, it will have to make earlier processing stages unavailable to high-level attention.